Erosion Play with Snow

[WAS]

Playing with a erosion, though not as happy as I thought I'd be. The higher resolution maps all the way up to 6k for Streamlines are full of round "plumes" which make it almost useless for a proper mask at anything than I'm assuming 8K+ maps. This I find od too as even 4k heightmaps from World Machine look much better in TG, especially streamlines for smaller flows which aren't full of pock-marks. The render is not using the streamline map as it creates more spots than the flow map as a mask. Like thousands and thousands of random spots.

[Dune]

You might have to find the right settings. I hardly ever use higher resolution than 1500 (or so), btw.

[WAS]

You might have to find the right settings. I hardly ever use higher resolution than 1500 (or so), btw.

Really? That's surprising to know. Though I have to say the erosion times would be a lot better. Once you start getting past 6k the calculation times are nuts.

[Dune]

Once you start getting past 6k the calculation times are nuts.

This plugin of Daniil is already soooooo much faster. He really did a great job. Don't forget it's a pretty incredible calculation that has to be done. I don't like long waits either, hence my use of smaller resolution.

[leafada]

I also bought Daniil's plugin before. I will test it later.

[WAS]

Once you start getting past 6k the calculation times are nuts.

This plugin of Daniil is already soooooo much faster. He really did a great job. Don't forget it's a pretty incredible calculation that has to be done. I don't like long waits either, hence my use of smaller resolution.

It is a great plugin. The maps are really useful.

Honestly though, for the level of detail and distances sizes, the procedural is faster (definitely not in previews though and initial pass). But the procedural seems to give me the same look regardless of settings. The setting seem subtle past it's main erosions.

[Daniil]

Playing with a erosion, though not as happy as I thought I'd be. The higher resolution maps all the way up to 6k for Streamlines are full of round "plumes" which make it almost useless for a proper mask at anything than I'm assuming 8K+ maps. This I find od too as even 4k heightmaps from World Machine look much better in TG, especially streamlines for smaller flows which aren't full of pock-marks. The render is not using the streamline map as it creates more spots than the flow map as a mask. Like thousands and thousands of random spots.

There is the parameter "Laminar flow" which results in more precise flows with less blurring due to random processes. Please try enable it and see if this is what you want.
Also note that Streamline map is a special map for special purposes, it shows parallel flow lines in the water streams. It can be useful for e. g. texturing glaciers, in this case it is better to multiply or mask it by deposition map.

Daniil

[WAS]

Wait, so the Streamline map is not a true Streamline (Streamwise) erosion?

I've been using it as it should be used, nothing special, but effecting flows, and their separate erosion when water is running low, or high, during different seasons; creating streamwise flows. For example, our large creek that runs into Puget Sound will soon be at low level, and instead of being a single creek, will have many streamwise streams cut through it's bed. Naturally in a mountainous setting, with freezing, these will freeze and fill with snow.

Also did not know about the Laminar flow, I've been looking at it but had actually checked it to see any results.

[Oshyan]

WAS, if you haven't already seen it, check the quick parameters guide here, because I don't think "streamlines" is doing what you think it's doing:
https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,23764.msg240241.html#msg240241

- Oshyan

[WAS]

WAS, if you haven't already seen it, check the quick parameters guide here, because I don't think "streamlines" is doing what you think it's doing:
https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,23764.msg240241.html#msg240241

- Oshyan

'

Seems to be reiterating what was said here, which nonetheless is vague. If it is different from streamline erosion elsewhere, those differences should be noted.

Here is an example of streamlines within a larger flow. They're created by streaming water. Searching this anywhere seems to yield the same result about small scale low-load erosion through softer sediments (topsoils).

Nevertheless what I am doing with them, is what is described in examples, whether simulated or in geology, and masking these flows into the larger flow maps for smaller scale flowing, which looks nice. The quality of the maps is the issue. Higher resolution heightmaps just yield larger shapes, rather than clearer resolution.  Example, I took my saved projects from before purchasing and opened them to up resolution with, naturally, I assumed, higher resolution maps. But the resolution is the same, the shapes are different. Which has changed my projects looks and was not what I thought was going to happen at all.

[Daniil]

Seems to be reiterating what was said here, which nonetheless is vague. If it is different from streamline erosion elsewhere, those differences should be noted.
Here is an example of streamlines within a larger flow. They're created by streaming water. Searching this anywhere seems to yield the same result about small scale low-load erosion through softer sediments (topsoils).
Nevertheless what I am doing with them, is what is described in examples, whether simulated or in geology, and masking these flows into the larger flow maps for smaller scale flowing, which looks nice. The quality of the maps is the issue. Higher resolution heightmaps just yield larger shapes, rather than clearer resolution.  Example, I took my saved projects from before purchasing and opened them to up resolution with, naturally, I assumed, higher resolution maps. But the resolution is the same, the shapes are different. Which has changed my projects looks and was not what I thought was going to happen at all.

Streamline map doesn't display streamline erosion, it just shows erosion directions, or streamlines of all the water that flows over the terrain.
As for maps fidelity, I propose to try and enable "Laminar flow", it should increase the sharpness and perceived maps resolution.

Daniil

[WAS]

Streamline map doesn't display streamline erosion, it just shows erosion directions, or streamlines of all the water that flows over the terrain.

Sounds like we're explaining the exact same thing, one way in a coding perspective, and the other in a geological perspective lol All of your "flow maps" in the real world start from Streamwise erosion, aka, your Streamlines. Again, they work great for the application used, if their resolution was sharper for colour mapping.

As for maps fidelity, I propose to try and enable "Laminar flow", it should increase the sharpness and perceived maps resolution.

Going to give that a shot in the morning. Playing with flames again and doing a full slow render that'll take all night. Probably for bad looking flames. Seeds n' all.

[Oshyan]

Strange, from the images in the thread I linked, I really understand "streamlines" to be different than you do. What you are showing in that image is basically just normal fluid-based erosion, deposition, etc., just on a smaller scale. That's not what "streamlines" is explained or demonstrated to do (in the image), as far as I can see. Not sure why we have this difference of understanding though, as it's based on the same info and images...

- Oshyan

[WAS]

Strange, from the images in the thread I linked, I really understand "streamlines" to be different than you do. What you are showing in that image is basically just normal fluid-based erosion, deposition, etc., just on a smaller scale. That's not what "streamlines" is explained or demonstrated to do (in the image), as far as I can see. Not sure why we have this difference of understanding though, as it's based on the same info and images...

- Oshyan

Streamline is Streamwise Erosion. It is the BASE of the large flows you see in his plugin. What will eventually create those flows... It's really not hard to understand. Do you think flows are spawned overnight from nothing? They start from streamlines... the "just on a smaller scale" as you put it. But this is not cutting stone. This is pushing sediments.

If it is not streamline/streamwise, name it something else. "Flow Direction". But as far as I can plainly see it represent the direction of flow over any surface... EXACTLY WHAT THE STREAMWISE EROSION PROCESS IS. It is sedimentary. These streamlines push things, no matter what your interpretation of reality is. Using these maps, some fractalization, you can create very realistic streaking for flows... Just like in the real world.

Where do you think this "detail" is coming from to used for "texturing" glaciers, etc? As the sun warms glaciers, streams flow, cutting tiny paths that interact with light... There is no actually texturing of ice but mud and debris... It's light refraction of shape.

Almost feel there is a language barrier here.

A real world application of streamlines is the suspended load below a dam based on the hydrological and sediment data that reaches below the dams. This can show sediment concentration and median increases/decrease through the development of scouring time.  They study how sediments concentrate and flow to learn how sedimentary flows are created in real-time which helps data for long-term erosion like rock. Literally every bit of water-based erosion you see, started with streamwise erosion on a tiny scale with sediments. This load volume in streamlines cuts rock.

Things are being too heavily emphasized on the coding aspect, and focus on a glacier, rather than the real world application these maps can provide.

[Oshyan]

I feel like you're arguing with me about Daniil's choice of name and/or description? I'm just saying what I see the docs and image showing, not what I think it should necessarily be named or anything. And yes, Daniil is a non-native English speaker, so perhaps indeed there is a language issue. At this point I'm not sure if you think it should be renamed, or if you are saying it does what you are saying it does, or what. I'm sure Daniil is open to changing the name if you ask though. Just remember, I'm only trying to explain Daniil's plugin (based largely on his own docs), we have no official relationship with him though, so ultimately it's him you need to engage with if you want something to change.

- Oshyan